HomeMy WebLinkAboutC36530 - Concept Plan - Presidents Plaza East-West Prkng Lots CONTRACT NO. C36530
STAFF REPORT
CITY OF PALM DESERT
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
MEETING DATE: November 16, 2017
REQUEST: Request for selection and approval of the desired concept plan for
the improvements to the Presidents Plaza East and West parking
lots; authorize staff to solicit prequalifications from design-build
entities; and solicit design-build proposals from entities deemed to
be qualified for the design and construction of the Presidents Plaza
East and West Improvements (Project No. 758-14).
Recommendation
By Minute Motion:
1. Select and approve desired concept plan for Presidents Plaza East
and West Improvements (Project No. 758-14);
2. Authorize staff to solicit prequalifications from design-build entities;
3. Authorize staff to solicit design-build proposals from entities deemed to
be qualified for the design and construction of the Presidents Plaza
East and West Improvements; and
4. Appropriate $8 million from unobligated Capital Project Funds to
Account No. 4514692-4400100, SARDA Bond Project Funds.
If the above actions are approved, funds will be available in Account No.
4514692-4400100, SARDA Bond Project Funds.
Strategic Plan
Economic Development Priority No. 1: Expand job and business creation opportunities.
Action Step: Revitalize Highway 111. Look at creating a possibility of creating a
"City Center"atmosphere.
Staff believes that to encourage growth and revitalization of the Highway 111 corridor,
the City must be an active participant. Assistance with providing large blocks of
attractive and efficient public parking will serve the City's interest with regard to the
redevelopment of the Highway 111 corridor.
November 16, 2107 - Staff Report
Presidents Plaza Concept Plan Approval and Authorization for Design-Build
Page 2 of 6
General Plan Objective
Chapter 10 City Center Area Plan: The intent of this Chapter of the General Plan is to
create an in-depth plan aimed at establishing a true city center within Palm Desert by
creating a framework, design objectives, and implementation techniques for future
development.
Goals and Policies 3.6 Parking Strategy: Encourage district-scale and shared
parking strategies while discouraging new surface parking lots.
Finding a long term solution to the Presidents Plaza parking area will serve the goals as
listed in the General Plan for providing large scale, shared parking lots.
Executive Summary
The Presidents Plaza East and West parking lots have been in a state of deterioration
for approximately 20 years. The last major City project that revitalized the two parking
lots was designed and constructed in 1997. The two parking lots have excessive tree
root damage and excessive utility trenching that have damaged the pavement structure
beyond repair. The City Council directed staff to produce concept plans that incorporate
paseos and pocket parks within the two parking lots. Staff has completed the two
concepts for the parking lots. The first concept has pocket parks only, and the second
concept incorporates a combination of pocket parks and paseos. The estimated cost of
construction for either concept is between $6 and $8 million.
The reconstruction of the two parking lots requires extensive utility relocation, drainage
improvements, accessibility improvements, and the loss of parking spaces. The first
concept, or the pocket park concept, for both lots requires the elimination of
approximately 9 percent of the 828 total parking spaces (75 spaces) between both lots.
The pocket park concept is within the City's parking lot maintenance rights, and does
not require consent of the property owners. The second concept, or paseo and pocket
park concept, will require the elimination of approximately 25 percent of the 828 total
parking spaces (208 spaces) between both lots. The paseo and pocket park concept is
an extensive renovation that will eliminate excessive amounts of parking, will require full
consent of the property owners, and may require acquisition of property and/or
easements. The paseo and pocket park concept will extend the timeline for the project
by several years and may put the use of currently available funds out of reach.
Regardless of the concept chosen, the project will need to be phased. Staff anticipates
that the phased construction will need to take place during two summers to minimize
disruption of the winter season.
Background Analysis
In the early 1990s, a Business Improvement District (BID) was formed to provide
funding for common parking lot maintenance, waste removal, street sweeping,
November 16, 2107 - Staff Report
Presidents Plaza Concept Plan Approval and Authorization for Design-Build
Page 3 of 6
landscape maintenance, and parking lot lighting for the benefit of all property owners
within the Presidents Plaza East and West parking lots. The BID was to be re-
evaluated and re-established on a 5-year basis. However, the funds collected through
the district were not sufficient for the maintenance of the two parking lots.
In May 1997, the City Council approved a contract for professional design service to
redesign and re-landscape Presidents Plaza East and West parking lots. The cost of
the redesign was approximately $53,000, and was completed in June 1997. The design
completely changed the circulation of the parking lots, added approximately 237 parking
spaces; and introduced significant lighting, irrigation, and landscaping upgrades to both
parking lots.
In September 1997, the City Council awarded a construction contract in the amount of
$450,000 to Dateland Construction for the realignment, landscaping, and lighting of the
Presidents Plaza East and West parking lots.
In 2003, the property owners re-established the BID, which levied a tax on each parcel
around the parking area to fund annual operations. Unfortunately, this BID was not
configured to collect adequate funding for needed improvements, including capital
replacement of the asphalt surface, which has deteriorated to the point where complete
reconstruction is needed.
In March 2006, staff proposed a project for Presidents Plaza East and West that would
renovate the existing in-ground trash enclosures, remove palm trees, and fix damaged
and deteriorated sidewalks. The estimated cost of construction was approximately
$500,000. At that time, the City Council directed staff to review the needs of the district
and re-evaluate if the money to be spent was the most appropriate use of public funds.
The renovation, palm tree removal, and sidewalk repair project was subsequently
abandoned.
In April 2007, the City Council awarded a contract for professional design services in the
amount of $45,000 to analyze and produce concept plans for parking structures on
Presidents Plaza East and West parking lots. The study resulted in a concept that
would cost approximately $20 million to construct both structures. At that time, the City
Council and staff concluded that the cost for construction of the parking structures was
prohibitive. The parking structure concept was subsequently abandoned.
In May 2014, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2014-41 and SA-RDA-033
approving the execution of a Presidents Plaza Parking Lot Improvements Project bond
proceeds funding agreement in the amount of $8 million between the Successor Agency
to the Palm Desert Redevelopment Agency and the City of Palm Desert.
In August 2016, the City Council hosted a study session wherein staff presented the
current deteriorated physical state of the Presidents Plaza East and West parking lots.
As a result of the study session, staff was asked to review the legality of the City's
November 16, 2107 - Staff Report
Presidents Plaza Concept Plan Approval and Authorization for Design-Build
Page 4 of 6
participation in revitalization of the private parking lots, and the willingness of property
owners to deed over the property underlying the parking lots. Staff was also asked to
pursue alternative designs that might incorporate pocket parks and open space areas.
In March 2017, a second study session was hosted by the City Council. At that session,
staff presented the results of a Presidents Plaza ownership survey. Only 16 out of the
36 property owners responded to the survey. The majority of the respondents were not
in favor of paying any additional assessments to fund operations, maintenance, or
capital replacement costs of the reconstructed parking lots. Nor were they willing to
deed their property to the City in exchange for construction of parking improvements.
Therefore, staff presented three options to the City Council as possible solutions for
moving forward. The options presented to the City Council were as follows: slurry the
existing parking lot, reconstruct the parking lot using bond funds, or construct a parking
structure. The City Council, at the March 23, 2017, City Council meeting, chose the
option recommended by staff that would reconstruct the two parking lots using bond
proceeds.
As a result of the August and March study sessions staff produced two parking lot
concepts. Each concept presents its own unique strengths and weaknesses. Those
strengths and weaknesses are identified as follows:
Option 1 - Paseos and Pocket Park Concept
Strengths
• Enhanced landscaping in pocket parks and paseos
• Introduces a park-like setting to the parking areas and an increase in
greenspace
Weaknesses
• Loss of 25 percent of the current parking stalls (75 spaces)
• Delay in construction of up to 2-5 years
• Property and easements may need to be purchased
• Requires majority of property owners will need to approve
• May lose ability to use bond funds for the project.
Options 2 - Pocket Park Concept
Strengths
• Loss of only 9 percent of current parking stalls (208 spaces)
• No easements or property purchase requirements
• Bond funds available for construction
• Shortened project construction schedule
Weaknesses
• Enhanced landscaping only in pocket parks
November 16, 2107 - Staff Report
Presidents Plaza Concept Plan Approval and Authorization for Design-Build
Page 5 of 6
Knowing the strengths and weakness of each concept, the City Council has the
opportunity to select the concept that best delivers the vision for the City of Palm
Deserts shared parking lots within the Highway 111 corridor.
Project Description
The reconstruction of both parking lots will be extensive and disruptive to the business
owners. The work will include a complete reconstruction of the parking area, the
introduction of underground drainage, complete utility relocation, and accessibility
upgrades. The improvements will also include new solar carports, landscaping,
irrigation, and redesigned lighting. The complete cooperation from all of the utility
companies will be necessary, especially Southern California Edison. Edison's electrical
backbone will need to be redesigned and relocated. All existing utility connection points
will need to be moved from the middle of the parking lots closer to the existing buildings.
Staff will work with the business community and the contractor to phase the work so that
disruption is kept to a minimum. The project will be phased and is expected to be
constructed over two summers. The lifespan of a project of this nature should be 20-30
years with the appropriate maintenance activities.
Fiscal Analysis
There is no fiscal impact associated with the request for qualification phase of this
project; however, the cost of the project is currently estimated between $6 and $8
million. Staff is requesting the appropriation of $8 million to Account No. 4514692-
4400100 from unobligated Capital Project Funds pursuant to the Bond Proceeds
Funding Agreement with the Successor Agency to the Palm Desert Redevelopment
Agency. The current maintenance budget for the two parking lots is approximately
$225,000 per year. Once the project is complete, staff estimates between $12,500 and
$16,500 per year in additional maintenance costs depending on the concept plan
chosen.
Prep ed by. Joel Montalvo, P.E., Senior Engineer
November 16, 2107 - Staff Report
Presidents Plaza Concept Plan Approval and Authorization for Design-Build
Page 6 of 6
LEGAL REVIEW DEPT. REVIEW FINANCIAL REVIEW CITY MANAGER
N/A rej/ r.. 2/(u)4,e
Robert W. Hargreaves Mark G eenwood, P.'. J Moore Lauri Aylaian
City Attorney Directo of Public Works Director of Finance City Manager
ATTACHMENTS: Vicinity Map
Concept Plans with Pocket Parks and Paseos
Concept Plans with Pocket Parks
,0�3 n
o
,,,./..7,,,,., -.... ..k.,0
m m
,all co
o_ b LARKSPUR LN LARKSPUR LN v
, } •fb 2 - 0
xi xi
. .
°''^�..... • �
■ •■
I.
:U .
} m
l Cl)
■ is
r : : ri �i r-
Co
n C. i7 0 v Co
C
y ■ ■ Co -A H ❑
� 23
. Q ■ ■ y a 0
1 9LF I xi ❑ zi
CD ■ ■ Co
CD • L) a
c s'1'Y<G,,s, • S n r
CD ■ 11 r
= �s'ir . bco
iii
,� ka
co
• 0
—a4G�S J ❑
REy.AVE 0
COSA N LUIS REY--A-VE-
N f Ar
Oa gie y
m A • r o �
COCo
A_ rm xi
0
v ao ov 2 ❑
* •
• • 3 rA-
• • °m `, ❑ m
CD
•
rrs a
III
•
�� • Zr
y cn
X Co
• • m
■I . (I)N7 ZIV d AJ)l3Itld • ■ n
• • r
i ■
_ Corn
Xi. n1 Co
m , AAI
n Co
A o
0
7-01a-od 3-AV 1V7-0ia-Od PO-RTO-L4-a VE
I 1 / r 1 1rq
►►
V
y..►i►p�':-' 0 4 scxc rns
,d11'11,Y`'`� ` ►►�
CO q,/ .4' ti A �,►�
/ ►
m0 Wk ►I LARKSPUR LANE
c>p'►►►
1.
z :,rti , .A/ 1 •�a*. l S m
1
4a//mi ' A - / IL\\\\
C13
.i,
' fin~ nV1 �' •
r
ill �, m
ik
' \ 9+ I',.( MME.. -
rm III' VJ
' a
[ i ,,,M #4.. 6' 101
in
Ili.,..'
ile
\\\
Nit
' N
11' 24' -1$' �{ 14' 18' 18'- 24' 18' ?; ��� ' ��
ria
N 71 IA.e._
4 ( :---).1 .
t'(i _,_
II
M ;flu_ � -0 0 -I
A a ./
A ^ ' 40 ra i. I:a MAX MAX 1 1IT MAX MAX ' ][
a
z 1. 1, , ., •,.... v..i„. .i, il
•
$ ,c.\ II— . N. t \\:i _1 (n ), _1 _
� r� Aft-� • FAW m air
li
a 1 n y 3 de�� r a
z
ri -. ) r r 4
ji
=is li k •yN N
I SiC-' 24' a 18'-14' 18'J 74' 18';'• ^ 0
x n 'i + __ C7 C
zx 24 :� I m Z —I
0 i MAX MAX A',".c. ' 11_ MAX 2%1 0 t
33
a - I, o
rgig
�' n i'`•" ►III ;I� re i Z -I
8. 5 - :
•
I Emil.
�lbiM W Z
1 0 m
y ►. • Cr)�� ,i . 0 -0
WI
m r A III
{J �fcn A ® 7 r+3 . I 1 L
r
0
pr t
Q
1
i COO
,km •rt:N...•
;
rtn
pr
�m I`
.4SP
f T
i• '111Iii . F.,
33 _
),
m , ..... •. •
AM NJ
p
►► A L i1
„'a 10 r�r I5 E
M;„T LIE -
a-- V
iii 1 k, :::.!.:. Ii. lik 4.11 .-:-.)- '!-, -,-1 1,
> , „„,... ,„.:.::..::., „ ,
0 ...„„„,,„ ,„:,:.::,,,:, ; . ..., — . . . ,... - ,
,_ \
,, „.. , .., 11. ,,,A igni: -0
z ' y� ,a m
+dam �:,;i� /vmv\ CD
, nun rim
m
o
F j1 ?
•pi
•' 1 f*F�. '�!�1.03 a f'.:; CD
1.
1 1ff� 1 4�+1 T
k11.'. 1 PM'1111 I4. V
1 �� i '+g�1P ; 11. 11 1:! N
1 p . x Li
X ' ` `v�at I
�
::.
x 83. iiiii �,' . 2 14'
,-
' r 1:..::.. 4_
MAX • MA ti* �i 5X 1
\ it L 1
, co K _ ,
1 II 16 A. il► r7,1,25.54' 9
1
► i r > U]
1 r
I. Lei r r r
. l,...'.
Or ' i' co — fl
ti
iit
I.
I. ail. ►► ` Q
--1 I .
tip. 'lc 01111 m '.<
..„41 iv .0! ..• -F. ........ (7) 0 c
33
'1111
Air, m N) 1- -0 a.
-,:i . .ir - .......§4.,,. 11. w 0,
› ,...• 4,1110.4-47 . Albio, 1 r 0 (f) 0 -1--1
. r C Q
y - ,�
M r
�, r,, • CO Z
- 1.7 16' 16' 7.,:rj1m
r , kali L co —I
u .� << •,
11
' -wip la. Aril A I— >
k ip. ... .0, -Ii. Ir...4.111
plii
F�d
N ,,,,,. 4...941 ,......: zi
... . ti 4.. ,IL —
m �„�� OP
ti MAX y Axe. ❑
m ■�
z I��a ,
0 115/p . \* 4
111=1=1.17 $. "•-•:„.•••••• llit
22
„will
'' i � - o
i - I
1> i
s ,� 1
-rl. .1111. fp' iiir
e ,.,,,,,.. ....,, ,
.,
r,,,,,, .,., ! :11' -411 51+ l
.f ■ill ►•iii 4
7 A 6.84 r ►5'11e1i 16' 7.Ii
a '
r I
- a Lxi
h!'
1 j §' . --' ,'. - _ ---
G7 � �i�
a a,.
mMIL PORTOLA AVENUE
[n _t
■
1$1
///'<i!!:ir,
z 4‘,..V\T.ol#1,1 —I 4,sua. pirm-7,----
Cn i _,+4 :,K+. 1
a ,0 4I LARKSPUR LANE
1 p �T
i N rp.� — -- — - -
i f
.. l'i.!
\--° •,.•
i! mil:1 I.. -0
. -L, IN
ft
1 \ 7+ NI
a Ni' X. CO
/, n 0
'[ §/° '' m
.
fUl i I z
Ate'
1 k.1/41,.
_ L I - • )
- I
I ::IL_24' -18 18- 24 -18118'- 24 `-18 iE
CO
:�
4 d� a0
1
�' S + III I
\ ,
, ,,,
,„,
,,, 4.i„. ,
x 10 Q N
Z \ 1 �I 5% s
V I2 - CO 0 CO m
-Et ^ \ y>� S I5 MAX MAX `1 MAX3.1 � f 2% .
MAX
VC, �ti f n, r:'
LC'
ii
CO
v ..\ m ) 1 11)\
4' 4. row' rh f'`' ,"� I: �yv , A% _ 'p
1 0 9 •
® � �p. ( T
Iv
i. M CO 0
r— rn Cl) V r
IL, rn
I li LE
— 18'— 24' —18� 18'- 24' �� IS 24' 18 ', L f.
'+�I ImbI xi ÷ L, 0
53 ' 2% 5x 5% �� T' m Z > r
v MAX MAX MAX IM MAX %' 0 I > DJ
-I i� m1r
'M CD 0 M a
-
0 C
pv T �;Y� OE
I• I% Z > —I —I
N ;!Y• Cn Z
a . N
NE
i•
im i � •v
um0 ^0
•
cnn - 1 �� I 1— ` J
I
1)MEE 3.-1 \ •'-4...'74. ! ! )
A. NNE{ g /1 + ;ifl - ,
Ili r
rrprTi i MEM jr4 B "'''' M. • pill
N��I INFIRMf�i��� I 37
0 ■lull ' \M/./ X
m ���i���1
z ; GJ
«iM
C — :...
; 1 ; ] r\ e,,-E„ri,l W.4A',.,
i i ,
N nI
Y ck� - I
N>ai in�xx �zr'
�_� nu, r .LLi f _
�. _ r
i_ -:-
..-....' gLu . .
r~~
A� F 7
7. AM r-r2i -f
_ - t N L urS REY A�� E
. 111
� ..
I
1 J.,
7y■■ L.�,,
• L
��►►► SAN r±u j, f�
RE
SCALE.NT$
m • ;:;;..►►'.
a i S ., Oa, r■► 4/4„..... f
' ►%r Its
�Ig •
a
#4 a �., ... t /VVV\ /
a �' �` 7.
Wirt fANN
1 a W' VA'
K 4II
m IOW i Milli,igh 1► i
, t o
1 0 �sf11 �.
1> rT
' �Q ® 4141 '3 12' al 1
r 411. '
0 ii • ' "' > N
z " iiiiitti:
�,43 x�
,„„,(Ali . -
41 co 0 co >
F.) -,Y., \ ,c,„ \ -
1 , co
�� MAX M 1N
CD
II i 16 it► I(25 54' 9..i� I V) 2
4:: .77
. \
. .
li ► I ,..
.,..,...o. wr,
sit :i r r1- 1- ..< w
. , •
70 ii
.ti IF U} r
•
x PII r c) 0 -1
�; , I -
' r
9,
��1. ���I ' ❑
461
II
I
,,
O < 85+ f rYMI Z —I
E,0
r
111> 4r:'
-c - 7,25is•.340+' 22.5'�35 16'_3.• 2 0 I
i �r � s�Yl L
I+ :' AP 'gall -. 1�: p a�
rn n inil rnn L I �• K4 •.9. r
2 it��► r j i t �.�► �lid Z / I rn
0 ill 01_ .
. i. IIEN P- 4 1 PA,„_40 4p..... 1.
% 5% 5
rn 11►,�I,. 1P• , •A4 MAX ■ MAX ■■ 5x %, 1
+
M r ! A I
,„..._.,„
..
CD
• ,.,.
I ) ,
} � 4::
■ ■ , 41
L.,> -gi j $ # iimill 1. ..
p p ►-
'A� M 0 4!!I I .
or Whit "NW
- ,',......al�
8 84 'Kiln • 22 5'�5y6' ,'r
r rig
If IL
1 2—
a a IIIIIIIIhw / -nitW:ieff
■Nri
a
m II& PORTOLA AVENUE
Cl) _ —
Klassen, Rachelle
From: Stendell, Ryan
Sent: Tuesday, November 14, 2017 3:27 PM
To: Klassen, Rachelle; Munoz, Rae
Subject: FW: Pres Plaza
Hi Rachelle/Rae:
One of the owners in Presidents Plaza wanted to make sure these comments were passed along to the council related to
the item on Thursday's agenda.
Ryan Stendell
Director of Community Development
Ph: 760.346.0611 Direct: 760.776.6386
rstendell@cityofpalmdesert.org
From: Chris Schoeneck Finailto:schoeneck@caostoneadvisors.comj
Sent: Friday, November 03, 2017 10:00 AM
To: Stendell, Ryan
Subject: RE: Pres Plaza
Ryan,
I took a look at the plans and really like the overall direction the plans are showing. I think this will be a very nice
improvement over the existing conditions. Here are my comments on the plans:
Landscape Center Island — I think this is a very nice touch in both plans. This was unexpected as an improvement but this
should really help soften the look of the parking lot, especially in the center of the parking field. It will also create a nice
termination of the N/S connector to HWY 111, especially after Hwy 111 starts to become more pedestrian friendly.
Paseos — I think the loss of an additional 70 spaces for a walking path that will not likely get used is not a good idea. It
would be better for shops if people to meander past storefronts on the side walk and window shop. I also think the loss
of extra parking will impact the city and the area in the near future when this area develops further.
Trash Enclosures — I am glad the trash enclosures are getting updated and ganged together. I think the primary location
of the trash enclosures at the entries to either side of the parking areas is a poor location for the trash enclosures. Their
location should be more evenly spaced between all of the shops rather than at the ends where stores in the center will
have to walk a long way with trash to reach the trash enclosures. Locating them more at the third points in the parking
lot would be a better location. Further, the four trash enclosures in the center of the lot will get over full consistently as
the stores in the center of the parking lot will mainly use those bins due to proximity. Lastly, I think it's not a good idea
to have the trash bins be located at the entries of the lots; this would be an eye sore to patrons entering the parking lot.
I think 'burying' them in the middle of the parking lot is a better way to hide them from a predominant public view.
Solar Panels — I really like that solar is potentially being included in this project. I would however consider its realistic
impact to the project. I would want to confirm the solar being added will actually offset the electrical usage for the
lighting in the parking lot. If the cost of adding solar to the project is taking away from adding more car ports due to its
cost, I would recommend adding more car ports. To improve the environmental impact of the parking area, I believe LED
lighting would be the primary upgrade.
1
EV parking — It looks like EV parking is part of the upgrade. I feel that both lots should receive an equal amount of EV
parking spaces. Currently President's Plaza West is receiving two spaces and President's Plaza East is receiving none.
Lighting — I want to make sure lighting is being considered as part of this upgrade.
Underground Utilities — Is there still conversation of needing to have the underground utilities re -worked prior to this
improvement moving forward?
Schedule — How can this project move forward to begin implementation in the summer of 2018?
I'm looking forward to hearing back from you about the questions in the comments above. Would you also let me know
what kind of action will be taken at the 11/16 meeting? Will the council be deciding on a plan on that day?
Thank you again for sharing these plans. I really appreciate it.
chr.s
Chris Schoeneck 1 Development Real Estate Associate
Capstone Advisors
T (760) 827-6030
2